“I don’t care who you love,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., at the start of last weekend’s Senate debate on allowing gays to serve in the military.

“If you love this country enough to risk your life for it, you shouldn’t have to hide who you are.”

For 17 years, the law of the land has demanded that gay service members live a lie under the odd compromise policy dubbed “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Laws that needlessly and counter-productively encourage lying should be wiped off the books, and the Senate was right to have the courage to do so.

In the early years of the Clinton administration, when the policy was forged, it actually appeared to be the lesser of two evils. The “don’t ask” part meant that commanding officers were not supposed to go out of their way to determine the sexual orientation of their subordinates.

But quite clearly, whether on the “ask” or “tell” side of the ledger, the policy didn’t work. About 14,000 people have been forced to leave military service under the old policy.

The vote by the Senate after the House had already agreed ends the possibility of a court-ordered end to the policy, which the Pentagon had very much hoped to avoid.

Were all military brass on board with the move? Of course not. This is not a slam-dunk issue. There have always been questions about the morale effects of straight and gay troops serving together.

Just as there were questions two generations ago about black troops serving with white troops, and one generation ago about women serving with men.

Marine Corps leadership – and individual Marines on the ground – were in particular relatively skeptical. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who obviously has a distinguished military record of his own, led the opposition.

While some brass were against the change, many are for it – very much including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And the vast majority of service members polled said they have served with gay colleagues and have no problem doing so.

That doesn’t mean the policy will be rushed in overnight. In fact, the repeal demands it will be eased in “consistent with military standards for readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention.”

What we hope will happen next is that some of those former service members unfairly drummed out under the old policy will be welcomed back if they are needed. A number of the more vocal victims of the rule, for instance, were graduates of Monterey’s Defense Language Institute at a time we desperately need speakers of Arabic and other Mideastern languages.

It’s a pleasant Christmas present for the nation to see the end of 17 years of discrimination.